Lack of Red Bull even being in the race on the weekend complicated any assessment of how the team are shaping up, but with two more races this month the picture of how competitive Red Bull are should be as clear as it is going to be this year.

When do you think a decision will be made? This month? This article suggest at least there will be talks in earnest this month and the deadline must be getting close.

Where do you see Ricciardo going (or staying)? The many articles about a deadline being agreed all mention talks in earnest in April. We are now in April. This means the decision is likely to be made by May at the latest, as any decision requires a block of time to ensure the agreement still looks ok one the legal teams have documented what was discussed.

This means it is unlikely there will be many more race results to consider, and the decision will need to occur based on knowing little about how this year is progressing beyond what we know already.

I wouldn't be surprised if he stayed, but I'm starting to think he'll probably leave. The buzz seems to be around Ferrari, but whether Mercedes picks him depends largely on how Bottas does and how Dan goes against Max this season.

I sense Ricciardo is a little frustrated with the situation at Red Bull at the moment. Poor reliability cost him a genuine chance at third place in the WDC last year, he's been on the raw end of some poor strategy decisions the past two years and the team has a pretty clear preference for which driver it wants to hold (this is despite Ricciardo having out-performed his team-mate in points scored over the two years they've been together).

I expect the Bahrain retirement would have stung quite a bit as well, as he really could have had a podium in Australia if not for his own mistake on Friday and was a genuine contender for the race win in Sakhir before the car turned itself off.

With Ferrari seeing a bit of a resurgence this year, I think he will have his eyes keenly looking at their situation with Raikkonen (who recently said he didn't expect to be in F1 in a few years time -- possibly hinting at a knowledge that he won't be here beyond this season). If Kimi does retire and Vettel has a strong 2018, Ferrari might however be wary of rocking the boat too much by bringing in somebody who could upset their current team leader.

Talking about engine resurgences, Honda has taken a step up with Torro Rosso compared to previous years with McLaren and Red Bull will undoubtedly be eyeing a switch when the time is right. Renault are investing heavily in their main squad, which will surely have created concerns at Milton Keynes that they're going to have a direct rival in their engine supplier soon. Traditionally when manufacturer teams start putting their foot in the door for title challenges, customers take the back seat.

Adrian Newey will one day retire. He's left and come back several times in the last few years by my reckoning, and Ricciardo will know that the team runs the risk of taking a pretty serious performance dent when that day comes. Luckily Adrian has been kept around a few years longer than I expect he was planning to - Dietrich Mateschitz's pockets must get deeper every year, or the Red Bull catering is to die for.

On the other hand, Ricciardo has traditionally had a very strong relationship with Red Bull and despite let-downs in recent years has never shown any great keenness to move away. The team has the potential, but really hasn't delivered anything like what he or its fans would have hoped since the beginning of the Mercedes-dominated era. Ricciardo is now in his seventh full-year of Formula One racing, and as 30 approaches he'll be itching to get himself in a position to challenge for a World Championship. In 2014 when he entered Red Bull at 24-years-old, took three wins and five podiums he would have been hoping to have a serious shot at the title within a couple of years. Four years on, Red Bull looks to lack a certain something to make the step up. Maybe it's the engine, maybe it's a fundamental performance issue within the company.

Without doubt one of the most interesting seat changes in the last few years.

Yes, especially if Honda turn out to be a big improveent this year. If they have Honda next year and they are good, They have a small chance of being the best team. Or hopefully about as good as Mercedes and Ferrari.

I think DR is the only proven top tier driver available that would integrate into Mercedes and not upset LH too much. By that I mean in terms of off track rivalry (mind games, etc) mainly due to the lack of ego DR has. I think on track would be a very interesting comparison and one that I would love to see, I think it would be very close between them.

Yes, especially if Honda turn out to be a big improveent this year. If they have Honda next year and they are good, They have a small chance of being the best team. Or hopefully about as good as Mercedes and Ferrari.

The key point on the deadline for the decision is that it is not like he can wait until the year pans out and then decide. All articles on the deadline suggest discussions are on in earnest in April...which is NOW.

So perhaps two more races to decide if a car which has broken down in one race already is reliable. I would think Ricciardo would also be watching how the team is treating its two drivers.

The key point is that there is little more time and results to take into consideration as talks should be taking place now on the publicly stated schedule. Perhaps two more races to read how teams comparing?

I think DR is the only proven top tier driver available that would integrate into Mercedes and not upset LH too much. By that I mean in terms of off track rivalry (mind games, etc) mainly due to the lack of ego DR has. I think on track would be a very interesting comparison and one that I would love to see, I think it would be very close between them.

End of May is how it reads for the deadline.

Mort Canard wrote:

Daniel signs with Merc by the end of June.

End of June would seem to require the deadline to slip quite a lot

pokerman wrote:

I thought that Red Bull had given Ricciardo a deadline for his decision sometime in May?

I think that seems to be what is reported.

Which means talks need to be happening now, and an agreement in principle around the end of this month to the legal teams time to pin down fine details so it can be announced.

The problem for Dan is that RBR have a couple of RB family drivers (Sainz and Gasly) waiting in the wings to take his seat that would complement Max, which I guess is why they're piling on the time pressure.

The problem for RBR is that while Dan is not as ultimately fast as Max, he does have stellar race craft and (usually) a nice habit of being in the right place at the right time to take home a bag of points.

What this mean is that if it all plays out badly it's possible that Dan could be without a top team seat, while RBR spends a season or 2 with a front running car that for whatever reason doesn't find a way to bring home enough points.

I take that to mean 'it can be announced any time after it is decided', and yes that makes sense, especially if he signs with Red Bull. Helmut Makro is quoted as saying 'once the deadline passes then we will make an announcement', but I think that is to ensure Red Bull are not kept in the dark too long if Ricciardo has signed with an opponent. Still, in that case, no announcement could be almost as revealing.

On a separate note, I think it can be underestimated how long it can take between "So we are both happy with a contract for this number of years at $X per year", and pinning down a full contract with performance provisions, exit clauses and assurance of equal equipment or whatever..... even if he is staying with red bull. And although no real agreement is in place until all those points are fully sorted in writing and with signatures, general agreement is required much earlier.

The problem for Dan is that RBR have a couple of RB family drivers (Sainz and Gasly) waiting in the wings to take his seat that would complement Max, which I guess is why they're piling on the time pressure.

The problem for RBR is that while Dan is not as ultimately fast as Max, he does have stellar race craft and (usually) a nice habit of being in the right place at the right time to take home a bag of points.

What this mean is that if it all plays out badly it's possible that Dan could be without a top team seat, while RBR spends a season or 2 with a front running car that for whatever reason doesn't find a way to bring home enough points.

A possible lose-lose situation....

The rumour is that he has signed a pre-contract with Ferrari meaning that if he leaves Red Bull then he goes to Ferrari, he's not going to walk out on Red Bull in the hope of getting a seat at either Ferrari or Mercedes.

The problem for Dan is that RBR have a couple of RB family drivers (Sainz and Gasly) waiting in the wings to take his seat that would complement Max, which I guess is why they're piling on the time pressure.

The problem for RBR is that while Dan is not as ultimately fast as Max, he does have stellar race craft and (usually) a nice habit of being in the right place at the right time to take home a bag of points.

What this mean is that if it all plays out badly it's possible that Dan could be without a top team seat, while RBR spends a season or 2 with a front running car that for whatever reason doesn't find a way to bring home enough points.

A possible lose-lose situation....

The rumour is that he has signed a pre-contract with Ferrari meaning that if he leaves Red Bull then he goes to Ferrari, he's not going to walk out on Red Bull in the hope of getting a seat at either Ferrari or Mercedes.

Naturally Dan won't walk without a confirmed seat. I guess what I was trying to say is that if Dan drew it out trying to confirm a seat at Merc or Ferrari, RBR could break off discussions and leave Dan without a seat anywhere else. He'd then have to scrounge a seat, perhaps with Renault.

But, if that pre-contract rumour is true, that'll ramp up the pressure on RBR to come to the party with either more $$$$ or a championship winning car, IF they actually want to keep him, which they may not.

Either way, I still think Dan HAS to leave RBR, otherwise my guess is that he'll end up being, "Webbered" by Marco and Max.

It would seem the only 3 serious options are stay, Ferrari or Mercedes.

Unlikely to be favourite driver at any of those three places... unless the roles of the dice by Max keep being unlucky ones.

He has around 2 to 3 races before conversations have to be very advanced, so in that time he has to where we will have have the possibility of becoming world champion.

Red Bull could be back to the top...but it seems only if Honda power really delivers or new regulations change the game. I cannot see how either of those can be firm enough in time for discussions, so you would think he would prefer Ferrari or Mercedes if they want him. But it does require that Ferrari look like they can compete with Mercedes over the next two races.

Nothing to do with bad luck, he's taking himself out at the moment, that's his own doing.

OK - my what i was trying to say became muddied. You make 10 moves with a 50% chance of resulting in damage... you expect to get damaged 5 times, and you should learn to find moves with a lower risk. The five times you don't have damage, it not because it was less risky those time, just those were the times you were lucky. Sometimes he takes to much of a risk....but that time there is no damage some claim him brilliant. My point is he does take to many risks.... which results in too many damaged cars, that is his fault. Luck is when he takes too big of a risk, but escapes damage on that occasion and thinks he is brilliant rather than just lucky that time.

Nothing to do with bad luck, he's taking himself out at the moment, that's his own doing.

OK - my what i was trying to say became muddied. You make 10 moves with a 50% chance of resulting in damage... you expect to get damaged 5 times, and you should learn to find moves with a lower risk. The five times you don't have damage, it not because it was less risky those time, just those were the times you were lucky. Sometimes he takes to much of a risk....but that time there is no damage some claim him brilliant. My point is he does take to many risks.... which results in too many damaged cars, that is his fault. Luck is when he takes too big of a risk, but escapes damage on that occasion and thinks he is brilliant rather than just lucky that time.

I like your analogy as I was going to post something similar myself regarding Verstappen, if you hit someone it can be seen as a 50/50 risk so you can be seen as lucky not to have your race compromised but also unlucky if it is.

Nothing to do with bad luck, he's taking himself out at the moment, that's his own doing.

OK - my what i was trying to say became muddied. You make 10 moves with a 50% chance of resulting in damage... you expect to get damaged 5 times, and you should learn to find moves with a lower risk. The five times you don't have damage, it not because it was less risky those time, just those were the times you were lucky. Sometimes he takes to much of a risk....but that time there is no damage some claim him brilliant. My point is he does take to many risks.... which results in too many damaged cars, that is his fault. Luck is when he takes too big of a risk, but escapes damage on that occasion and thinks he is brilliant rather than just lucky that time.

I like your analogy as I was going to post something similar myself regarding Verstappen, if you hit someone it can be seen as a 50/50 risk so you can be seen as lucky not to have your race compromised but also unlucky if it is.

Wouldn't 50/50 be the outcome (make it stick or not) and not the risk? The risk can also be very high or very low. Or am I thinking of this the wrong way?

Nothing to do with bad luck, he's taking himself out at the moment, that's his own doing.

OK - my what i was trying to say became muddied. You make 10 moves with a 50% chance of resulting in damage... you expect to get damaged 5 times, and you should learn to find moves with a lower risk. The five times you don't have damage, it not because it was less risky those time, just those were the times you were lucky. Sometimes he takes to much of a risk....but that time there is no damage some claim him brilliant. My point is he does take to many risks.... which results in too many damaged cars, that is his fault. Luck is when he takes too big of a risk, but escapes damage on that occasion and thinks he is brilliant rather than just lucky that time.

I like your analogy as I was going to post something similar myself regarding Verstappen, if you hit someone it can be seen as a 50/50 risk so you can be seen as lucky not to have your race compromised but also unlucky if it is.

Wouldn't 50/50 be the outcome (make it stick or not) and not the risk? The risk can also be very high or very low. Or am I thinking of this the wrong way?

I'd be very excited by the prospect of a Hamilton-Ricciardo lineup. Daniel has convincingly beaten Vettel in the same car before and I'm not sure anybody would be 100 per cent confident they could predict who would come out on top in a one-year battle between the Brit and the Australian.

OK - my what i was trying to say became muddied. You make 10 moves with a 50% chance of resulting in damage... you expect to get damaged 5 times, and you should learn to find moves with a lower risk. The five times you don't have damage, it not because it was less risky those time, just those were the times you were lucky. Sometimes he takes to much of a risk....but that time there is no damage some claim him brilliant. My point is he does take to many risks.... which results in too many damaged cars, that is his fault. Luck is when he takes too big of a risk, but escapes damage on that occasion and thinks he is brilliant rather than just lucky that time.

I like your analogy as I was going to post something similar myself regarding Verstappen, if you hit someone it can be seen as a 50/50 risk so you can be seen as lucky not to have your race compromised but also unlucky if it is.

Wouldn't 50/50 be the outcome (make it stick or not) and not the risk? The risk can also be very high or very low. Or am I thinking of this the wrong way?

I'm not sure what you mean?

There are only two outcomes, damage or not damage, right? Risk is different, you can make a high risk pass in improbable places or really late braking for example or a low risk pass, like DRS or to a backmarker. There are two different things in my head, I cannot put risk as 50/50